- From: Paul Topping <pault@dessci.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 19:49:34 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>, Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org>
My arguments were not political. I never used the word "deserves" or anything coming close to it. Sounds like you are the one making a political decision and using my position for cover. [Sorry to be so blunt, following your lead] So it looks like MathML will lose yet another battle. I'm sure it will survive this ding like it has all the others. Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 11:49 AM > To: Paul Topping <pault@dessci.com> > Cc: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>; Avneesh Singh > <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>; www-style list <www-style@w3.org>; W3C Digital > Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>; Peter Krautzberger > <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org> > Subject: Re: [mediaqueries] MathML > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Paul Topping <pault@dessci.com> wrote: > >> > Given a suitable definition of "UA implements MathML", there should > >> > be > >> no question that it exposes an important UA characteristic. Since > >> MathML is part of HTML5, it could be argued that it should have an MQ > >> even if all UAs report no implementation using it. > >> > >> There is not MQ for HTML5. There is no MQ for features of HTML5. So > >> that's not a very good guideline. > > > > I wasn't talking about MQ for features of HTML5. Just using MathML's > presence in the HTML5 spec as an indication that it is significant. If it can be > argued that MathML support is a "characteristic of the rendering device", to > use your phrase, then it is a significant one due to MathML's inclusion in > HTML5. > > (Sorry to be blunt here.) We don't make technical decisions based on political > reasoning. MathML doesn't get a MQ because it "deserves" it. > We make MQs when the information they expose has real use-cases for > authors: where there's some situation where the "default" rendering is > significantly worse for some reason, and being able to tell when you're in > that situation and adjust your styling accordingly has significant benefits. > > The original discussion about the math MQ in the CSSWG led us to believe > that it passed this bar (or was at least close to it; the MQ itself was simple > enough that it didn't need to clear a very high hurdle). Later discussion at > TPAC, which Florian summarized and I added to, has shifted our belief the > opposite way. It appears, based on the current information available to us, > that the above conditions are not met - current rendering techniques > generate results that are acceptable to page authors regardless of whether > MathML is natively supported or not, and knowing whether or not it was > natively supported wouldn't allow authors to significantly improve their page > rendering. > > ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2016 19:50:36 UTC